Science VS Non-science majors

[XeReX]

I read some where that non-science majors have greater GPAs as compare to science majors. It is because the non-science majors have easier courses and thus score higher on their respective courses resulting in higher GPAs. On the other hand science majors have to take harder classes and its difficult to get an A in those classes (e.g. A&P, biochem, genetics etc) thus it decreases their GPA.

Is it true? if yes, then to what extent?

Is it also true that adcomms prefer non-science majors and that they have a higher percentage of acceptance to med schools?

if all of this is true then science majors are screwed, i mean i know that you should major in what you like, so if some one likes sciences and major in biology that means that they will have a less chance of getting into med schools, just because of their science major.

I have heard from so many people saying that you shouldn't major in science coz college education should be well rounded and that you will learn as much science as you can in med school, so being a science major is pointless, but what if one only likes to be a bio major, does that mean that adcomms wont give them admission coz they are science majors?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

I read some where that non-science majors have greater GPAs as compare to science majors. It is because the non-science majors have easier courses and thus score higher on their respective courses resulting in higher GPAs. On the other hand science majors have to take harder classes and its difficult to get an A in those classes (e.g. A&P, biochem, genetics etc) thus it decreases their GPA.

Is it true? if yes, then to what extent?

Is it also true that adcomms prefer non-science majors and that they have a higher percentage of acceptance to med schools?

if all of this is true then science majors are screwed, i mean i know that you should major in what you like, so if some one likes sciences and major in biology that means that they will have a less chance of getting into med schools, just because of their science major.

I have heard from so many people saying that you shouldn't major in science coz college education should be well rounded and that you will learn as much science as you can in med school, so being a science major is pointless, but what if one only likes to be a bio major, does that mean that adcomms wont give them admission coz they are science majors?

Not really, remember whats difficult for you, may not be difficult for me. Biology for me personally is the most simple and pleasant subject I've ever studied. As such I don't refer to it even as a hard science but more comparable to a social science. In all honestly your major does not matter, however major in what you believe will be the easiest A and the most fun for you.
Also remember that the balancing factor is the science gpa. A biology major can stock up on easy biology courses to lift their gpa up very quickly.

 

[the duck]

I read some where that non-science majors have greater GPAs as compare to science majors. It is because the non-science majors have easier courses and thus score higher on their respective courses resulting in higher GPAs. On the other hand science majors have to take harder classes and its difficult to get an A in those classes (e.g. A&P, biochem, genetics etc) thus it decreases their GPA.

Is it true? if yes, then to what extent?

Is it also true that adcomms prefer non-science majors and that they have a higher percentage of acceptance to med schools?

if all of this is true then science majors are screwed, i mean i know that you should major in what you like, so if some one likes sciences and major in biology that means that they will have a less chance of getting into med schools, just because of their science major.

I have heard from so many people saying that you shouldn't major in science coz college education should be well rounded and that you will learn as much science as you can in med school, so being a science major is pointless, but what if one only likes to be a bio major, does that mean that adcomms wont give them admission coz they are science majors?

Yes, if you look at the statistics, nonscience majors have approximately a 10% higher acceptance rate than science majors. There is a rather lengthy thread about this, which attempts to explain this. The name is something along the lines of " music majors have 66% acceptance rate." I'd suggest you read that thread.
GPA per majors very depending on your school, but in general science majors are harder and have lower GPAs.

- A psych major

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Yes, if you look at the statistics, nonscience majors have approximately a 10% higher acceptance rate than science majors. There is a rather lengthy thread about this, which attempts to explain this. The name is something along the lines of " music majors have 66% acceptance rate." I'd suggest you read that thread.
GPA per majors very depending on your school, but in general science majors are harder and have lower GPAs.

- A psych major

I'd like to see some of these biology majors take advance philosophy or advanced English. It'd be like organic chemistry all over again.

 

[XeReX]

Yes, if you look at the statistics, nonscience majors have approximately a 10% higher acceptance rate than science majors. There is a rather lengthy thread about this, which attempts to explain this. The name is something along the lines of " music majors have 66% acceptance rate." I'd suggest you read that thread.
GPA per majors very depending on your school, but in general science majors are harder and have lower GPAs.

- A psych major

Yes i read that thread, but it basically says that music majors are naturally smart and taking music classes also help them build their skills, so that they are better at reasoning, and abstract thinking or wtv. but i don't get why non-science majors have a greater chance of acceptance? so does that mean that i should change my major from Physiology and Neurobiology to Sociology or Philosophy so that i can increase me chances of getting into med school.

 

[iwantMD]

Science = critical thinking = intelligence

Thus, I would say that person who did good in science major is intelligent. But I would not claim that person who did good in music is intelligent.

 

[IvyHopeful20]

Muahah @ memorizing biology = intelligence.

I'm not a science major (major was math). Love the pre-med superiority complex. The ability to analyze arguments, philosophies, etc is a much better sign of intelligence in my mind than memorizing the Kreb's Cycle.

 

[marble30]

Re: why some non-science majors have such a high acceptance rate - I thought it was because non-science majors were less likely to apply for med school.

 

[iwantMD]

Muahah @ memorizing biology = intelligence.

I'm not a science major (major was math). Love the pre-med superiority complex. The ability to analyze arguments, philosophies, etc is a much better sign of intelligence in my mind than memorizing the Kreb's Cycle.

Hey there einstein. wow you are god given gift to this earth. Thank you so much for clarifying. You are pure genius. Thank you so much for blessing us with your presence.

 

[IvyHopeful20]

99% of undergrad science is regurgitation and no critical thinking. If you memorize every step of every reaction and some simple rules, or do every physics problems, you will do well in the class. Period. People throw a hissy fit if there is a problem on the exam that's unlike the homework problems.

 

[IvyHopeful20]

Hey there einstein. wow you are god given gift to this earth. Thank you so much for clarifying. You are pure genius. Thank you so much for blessing us with your presence.

I'm actually below average in terms of my aptitude within my major. I am not claiming I am particularly intelligent.

You claimed that undergrad science major requires more 'intelligence'. I did not say math requires more intelligence.

Deal with your complex buddy.

 

[iwantMD]

99% of undergrad science is regurgitation and no critical thinking. If you memorize every step of every reaction and some simple rules, or do every physics problems, you will do well in the class. Period. People throw a hissy fit if there is a problem on the exam that's unlike the homework problems.

LOL ARE U EFFIN KIDDING ME? Thank you for letting us know that you are fake. May be next time start using your brain and you wouldn't have to make those crazy schedules to memorize.

 

[IvyHopeful20]

Um, yea. No I'm not kidding you. It's pretty much all memorization. There is very little critical thinking except in a few courses with teachers that predictably get killed on ratemyprofessors because 'their tests are nothing like the textbook problems.'

Sorry to burst your bubble. The skills you are talking about don't really come into play until you do research and/or graduate work. If you want critical thinking/analysis, I found it much more in courses like philosophy than Bio 101 or Physics 101.

 

[SterlingArcher]

99% of undergrad science is regurgitation and no critical thinking. If you memorize every step of every reaction and some simple rules, or do every physics problems, you will do well in the class. Period. People throw a hissy fit if there is a problem on the exam that's unlike the homework problems.

I don't know what undergrad you're going to, but at mine they make sure the tests can't be conquered by pure memorization. I'm not saying memorizing doesn't help, but in no way could someone get better than a C on my orgo final if they had no reasoning skills.

My personal theory: the people that apply as music/non-science majors have committed to two (or more) fields of study and have proven that they can do both. That versatility could probably be pretty valuable.

 

[iwantMD]

Um, yea. No I'm not kidding you. It's pretty much all memorization. There is very little critical thinking except in a few courses with teachers that predictably get killed on ratemyprofessors because 'their tests are nothing like the textbook problems.'

Sorry to burst your bubble. The skills you are talking about don't really come into play until you do research and/or graduate work. If you want critical thinking/analysis, I found it much more in courses like philosophy than Bio 101 or Physics 101.

wow not one word you said made sense. Stop embarrassing your self man. Why don't you go memorize some more math problems.

 

[IvyHopeful20]

Maybe my experience differs then. With mine, if you memorized every step, and recognized few patters about electronegativity/densities, etc, you would do more than fine.

If such a thing is not normal, and it requires a much deeper understanding to succeed, it makes no sense why an '8' is the average MCAT score in BS.

 

[wristbandMD]

but i don't get why non-science majors have a greater chance of acceptance?

Okay, these stats are kind of misleading. We look at them and see that say 60% of English majors are accepted, but only 40% of Biology majors (just an example).

Now, look at all of your premed friends. How many of them are majoring in Biology? Of all the premeds I know, I'd say about 60-70%. How many are majoring in a non-science? For me, it's about 5%.

There are many more applicants majoring in sciences than in non-sciences. Of the science majors, only a percentage actually take it seriously, in my opinion. The few non-science majors I know are more committed than most of the science majors I know.

The small amount of non-science majors really have to weigh beforehand whether or not med school is an option. A lot of science majors assume that because they are a science major, med school is the obvious next step.

 

[iwantMD]

Maybe my experience differs then. With mine, if you memorized every step, and recognized few patters about electronegativity/densities, etc, you would do more than fine.

If such a thing is not normal, and it requires a much deeper understanding to succeed, it makes no sense why an '8' is the average MCAT score in BS.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa what? What the hell is 8 on a MCAT anything to do with this lol.

 

[wristbandMD]

Sorry to burst your bubble. The skills you are talking about don't really come into play until you do research and/or graduate work. If you want critical thinking/analysis, I found it much more in courses like philosophy than Bio 101 or Physics 101.

Completely agree. 👍👍

 

[iwantMD]

Completely agree. 👍👍

Do you have any ideas what skills he is talking about before putting those thumbs up to support it. Because I don't recall mentioning any skills. When you do please let me know.

 

[IvyHopeful20]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa what? What the hell is 8 on a MCAT anything to do with this lol.

If you need such critical thinking skils to do well in basic science courses, why don't a lot more people ace the MCAT sections? Assuming that people who take the MCAT generally got a C or better in their pre-reqs. Same in VR - it's basically critical reading and analysis.

 

[iwantMD]

If you need such critical thinking skils to do well in basic science courses, why don't a lot more people ace the MCAT sections? Assuming that people who take the MCAT generally got a C or better in their pre-reqs. Same in VR - it's basically critical reading and analysis.

This is pure genius. All right dude. you win. You happy? Let me see that smile.

 

[Frazier]

I'm actually below average in terms of my aptitude within my major. I am not claiming I am particularly intelligent.

You claimed that undergrad science major requires more 'intelligence'. I did not say math requires more intelligence.

Deal with your complex buddy.

LOL ARE U EFFIN KIDDING ME? Thank you for letting us know that you are fake. May be next time start using your brain and you wouldn't have to make those crazy schedules to memorize.

Since Ivy seems to be a little overly-modest today, I will happily point out that he has a ~4.0 and 39 MCAT.

Also, I will disagree with him and say that math requires more intelligence.

Off the top of my head example: I am pretty sure that anyone that does well as a math major could also do quite well in bio, chem, etc if they wanted to [i.e. the subject/s held their interest enough to study]. However, I am positive that the reverse is not true for everyone.

Note: I am not a math major.

 

[IvyHopeful20]

I do have a high GPA but I work harder. I freely admit that I need to work harder than some of my friends in math to achieve an A. I know people who party all weekend and show up for an exam and just ace it. I can't.

Work ethic goes a long way, but it's not a sign of intelligence IMO.

 

[TarHeelEMT]

Science = critical thinking = intelligence

Thus, I would say that person who did good in science major is intelligent. But I would not claim that person who did good in music is intelligent.

I was both a science major and a non-science major. While the science classes often took more work, I had to do far more critical thinking in my philosophy classes.

 

[IvyHopeful20]

Anyway, we're OT and I don't want to talk about myself.

I'll just say that I don't think critical thinking skills are unique to science and disagree with the assertion that a high GPA In science requires more intelligence.

However, there is less emphasis on a curve in the humanities, and the averages aren't in the 60s or 70s in those classes like they are in the sciences. So I'll freely admit it's harder to get a 4.0 in science than in the humanities 🙂. But that's not due to more 'critical thinking skills' that are required, which was the source of my disagreement.

 

[iwantMD]

I took philosophy and I remember having to write bunch of BS essay to pass. But all of you are claiming that philosophy requires critical thinking. So can you guys please give me an example where critically thinking is required so I can better understand what you guys mean.

Thanks, IwantMD

 

[wristbandMD]

Do you have any ideas what skills he is talking about before putting those thumbs up to support it. Because I don't recall mentioning any skills. When you do please let me know.

I do have an idea what skills he is talking about. The ones you mentioned:

Science = critical thinking = intelligence

Thus, I would say that person who did good in science major is intelligent. But I would not claim that person who did good in music is intelligent.

Critical thinking is a skill, isn't it? 😛

And for the record, I am majoring in two sciences and minoring in a non-science. I find my non-science major (Bioethics, a branch of philosophy) to require much more "critical thinking" (your words, not mine) than either of my science majors.

And for the record, I completely disagree that critical thinking equals intelligence. I would not say that anyone who did well in a science major was intelligent, either. In fact, I know plenty of sub-par students who are science majors and yet manage to do well.

 

[wristbandMD]

I took philosophy and I remember having to write bunch of BS essay to pass. But all of you are claiming that philosophy requires critical thinking. So can you guys please give me an example where critically thinking is required so I can better understand what you guys mean.

Thanks, IwantMD

It's a matter of actually understanding the philosophy. Anyone can write a BS essay, but do you actually understand the material? Once you get into higher level philosophy classes itwill become clear that it requires critical thinking.

Can you tell me what informal fallacy you're commiting by asking your question? 😛

 

[iwantMD]

To wrist: that sentence still doesn't make any sense.

Anyways, according to MSAR, average science GPA for matriculates ranges between 3.5 to 3.75. Average non science GPA ranges from 3.75 to 4.0 Thus, we can infer that science GPA is harder to maintain than non science GPA because on average those who enter medical school seem to have far lower science GPA compared to non science GPA. Thus, non science majors who mostly take non science classes will have easier time maintaining GPA. Please don't post your own unique story and how it proves this wrong. We are talking about averages here.

End of argument.

 

[LuciusVorenus]

To the OP: non-science majors tend to have higher acceptance rates, and even higher sGPAs, because they are a self-selecting group. While almost every bio major, no matter the GPA, ends up applying to med school (often because they have no other choice), only non-science majors who know they have the grades and abilities spend the time/money to apply. You could also say the reason they have higher MCAT averages is because they often do better in verbal and writing. Also, most med schools don't count engineering as a science major (all the engineering classes I take are counted as non-science), and since most engineering majors have higher than average acceptance rates (some engineering major at my school can say 55-60%) they tend the bring up the average.

I took philosophy and I remember having to write bunch of BS essay to pass. But all of you are claiming that philosophy requires critical thinking. So can you guys please give me an example where critically thinking is required so I can better understand what you guys mean.

Thanks, IwantMD

What are you trying to say? There's no such thing as an easy/hard major, it just depends on the person. The class you took was most likely just a GE, you didn't major in philosophy or take any of the upper division classes. Whether you agree with him or not, you have to see the validity in what he says. Most schools, especially those on the quarter system, force students to memorize vast amounts of information without really learning what it means simply because they often have several midterms at week 3, punishing those who take the time to understand the Krebs cycle instead of memorizing it and then dumping it out for another cycle a few weeks later.

 

[wristbandMD]

To wrist: that sentence still doesn't make any sense.

Anyways, according to MSAR, average science GPA for matriculates ranges between 3.5 to 3.75. Average non science GPA ranges from 3.75 to 4.0 Thus, we can infer that science GPA is harder to maintain than non science GPA because on average those who enter medical school seem to have far lower science GPA compared to non science GPA. Thus, non science majors who mostly take non science classes will have easier time maintaining GPA. Please don't post your own unique story and how it proves this wrong. We are talking about averages here.

End of argument.

I'm not at all saying that science majors are easier/harder. I was agreeing that non-sciences require more critical thinking. In fact, science is much harder for me than any non-science class I've ever taken. But I still believe that non-sciences require more critical thinking.

 

[mitl]

Also, most med schools don't count engineering as a science major (all the engineering classes I take are counted as non-science)

If this is true then the stats are really deceiving because now you have

Electrical Eng., Comp Sci/Eng, Material Sc., Mech Eng., Chemical Eng., Aeronautical Eng on the non-science side and all of these majors require critical thinking and it is fairly hard to keep up gpa's and I can see a comitee sway towards a Chem Eng. when picking between bio and chem E

 

[eldoctor]

Science = critical thinking = intelligence

Thus, I would say that person who did good in science major is intelligent. But I would not claim that person who did good in music is intelligent.

Not to pick on you, but I have to say this is a pretty weak argument. As someone with both a science and non-science major, I can see the point of view of both sides. SOME science classes are MUCH more difficult than non-science, but there are also upper level philosophy, psychology, economics classes that would blow the minds of many premeds.

One doesn't have to be intelligent to be good at, or even pursue science. Same applies to non-science. There are countless parameters of intelligence (critical thinking is only one), and it would be naive to think that science majors are more intelligent than X majors.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

This is pure genius. All right dude. you win. You happy? Let me see that smile.

Why are you getting so angry over something someone on the internet is saying? I'm really confused as to why this is bothering you so much.

Also, I agree with Ivy, at least in the realm of biology. The vast majority of it is memorization and regurgutaion. Only a few courses, like phyiology and immunology, had a more conceptual basis. Need to do well on biochem? Spend a couple of hours memorizing. Need to do well in genetics? Spend a couple of hours memorizing.

What you have to understand is that there's a biiiiiiiig difference between sitting in a classroom and listening to your teacher talk to you about science and actually conducting research (and going through the scientific method) yourself.

 

[iwantMD]

If this is true then the stats are really deceiving because now you have

Electrical Eng., Comp Sci/Eng, Material Sc., Mech Eng., Chemical Eng., Aeronautical Eng on the non-science side and all of these majors require critical thinking and it is fairly hard to keep up gpa's and I can see a comitee sway towards a Chem Eng. when picking between bio and chem E

Engineering classes are hard. And if Engineering classes are non science, then something else must be pulling those averages up. it simply just goes to show how much easier the classes that require "intense critically thinking" are. lol

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

To wrist: that sentence still doesn't make any sense.

Anyways, according to MSAR, average science GPA for matriculates ranges between 3.5 to 3.75. Average non science GPA ranges from 3.75 to 4.0 Thus, we can infer that science GPA is harder to maintain than non science GPA because on average those who enter medical school seem to have far lower science GPA compared to non science GPA. Thus, non science majors who mostly take non science classes will have easier time maintaining GPA. Please don't post your own unique story and how it proves this wrong. We are talking about averages here.

End of argument.

Just because the sGPA is lower than the non-science GPA does not mean that you can infer that science majors are harder. There are too many confounders here. For example, the majority of applicants to med school are science majors, which means that they likely took very few non-science courses. And the non-science courses they did take were likely to be at the introductory level. This fact skews the data. Surely you're not suggesting that just because someone does well in Intro to Philosophy (arguably a pretty easy class) are going to do just as well in an upper-level philosophy course devoted to Nietzche and Kant? You can't infer that from these numbers, which you seem to do. Obviously if you take a few, introductory level non-science courses, it's likely that your non-science GPA will be higher than your sGPA.

I think it's kind of funny that you tried so hard to show the superiority of science majors (by saying it requires more critical thinking than non-science majors) and then failed to use that skill (that you apparently learned sitting in science classes) in this situation. I guess your science classes didn't really teach you much critical thinking after all...

 

[iwantMD]

Why are you getting so angry over something someone on the internet is saying? I'm really confused as to why this is bothering you so much.

Also, I agree with Ivy, at least in the realm of biology. The vast majority of it is memorization and regurgutaion. Only a few courses, like phyiology and immunology, had a more conceptual basis. Need to do well on biochem? Spend a couple of hours memorizing. Need to do well in genetics? Spend a couple of hours memorizing.

What you have to understand is that there's a biiiiiiiig difference between sitting in a classroom and listening to your teacher talk to you about science and actually conducting research (and going through the scientific method) yourself.

cool story bro.

 

[iwantMD]

Just because the sGPA is lower than the non-science GPA does not mean that you can infer that science majors are harder. There are too many confounders here. For example, the majority of applicants to med school are science majors, which means that they likely took very few non-science courses. And the non-science courses they did take were likely to be at the introductory level. Surely you're not suggesting that just because someone does well in Intro to Philosophy (arguably a pretty easy class) are going to do just as well in an upper-level philosophy courses devoted to Nietzche and Kant? You can't infer that from these numbers, which you seem to do. Obviously if you take a few, introductory level non-science courses, it's likely that your non-science GPA will be higher than your sGPA.

I think it's kind of funny that you tried so hard to show the superiority of science majors (by saying it requires more critical thinking than non-science majors) and then failed to use that skill (that you apparently learned sitting in science classes) in this situation. I guess your science classes didn't really teach you much critical thinking after all...

Want a hug?

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

Want a hug?

Since you have no response to my post other than trying to think I need a hug, sure I'll take that hug. If it makes you feel better.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Why are you getting so angry over something someone on the internet is saying? I'm really confused as to why this is bothering you so much.

Also, I agree with Ivy, at least in the realm of biology. The vast majority of it is memorization and regurgutaion. Only a few courses, like phyiology and immunology, had a more conceptual basis. Need to do well on biochem? Spend a couple of hours memorizing. Need to do well in genetics? Spend a couple of hours memorizing.

What you have to understand is that there's a biiiiiiiig difference between sitting in a classroom and listening to your teacher talk to you about science and actually conducting research (and going through the scientific method) yourself.

He wants you to pat him on the head and say you're doing a great job and you are smart. By objecting to his logic he believes you are objecting to what he associates to which is his belief that he's smart.

Being brutally honest, I see myself as intelligent in some area's. Now put a piano in front of me and you'll see i'm a idiot, put a piano in front of Mozart and make claim that he isn't one of the most intelligent and brilliant men who graced this Earth. There is no reason to make a blanket statement on the concept of something so subjective as intelligence.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

Being brutally honest, I see myself as intelligent in some area's. Now put a piano in front of me and you'll see i'm a idiot, put a piano in front of Mozart and make claim that he isn't one of the most intelligent and brilliant men who graced this Earth. There is no reason to make a blanket statement on the concept of something so subjective as intelligence.

👍

 

[eldoctor]

Want a hug?

In all seriousness I don't understand why you're mad. If you have a different opinion, express it without sounding like a douche. Just sayin'

 

[iwantMD]

Since you have no response to my post other than trying to think I need a hug, sure I'll take that hug. If it makes you feel better.

He’s climbing in your windows
He’s snatchin your people up
Tryna out smart em so y’all need to
Hide your kids, hide your wife
Hide your kids, hide your wife
Hide your kids, hide your wife
And hide your husband
Cuz they’re out smartin errbody out there
You don’t have to come and confess
We’re lookin for you
We gon find you
We gon find you
So you can run and tell that,
Run and tell that
Run and tell that, homeboy
Home, home, homeboy We got your t-shirt
You done left fingerprints and all
You are so smart
You are really smart–for real

 

[iwantMD]

In all seriousness I don't understand why you're mad. If you have a different opinion, express it without sounding like a douche. Just sayin'

Its ok there. You ll get through. Have faith in lord.

 

[iwantMD]

He wants you to pat him on the head and say you're doing a great job and you are smart. By objecting to his logic he believes you are objecting to what he associates to which is his belief that he's smart.

Being brutally honest, I see myself as intelligent in some area's. Now put a piano in front of me and you'll see i'm a idiot, put a piano in front of Mozart and make claim that he isn't one of the most intelligent and brilliant men who graced this Earth. There is no reason to make a blanket statement on the concept of something so subjective as intelligence.

oh my god; oh my god; this is so deep.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Yes i read that thread, but it basically says that music majors are naturally smart and taking music classes also help them build their skills, so that they are better at reasoning, and abstract thinking or wtv. but i don't get why non-science majors have a greater chance of acceptance? so does that mean that i should change my major from Physiology and Neurobiology to Sociology or Philosophy so that i can increase me chances of getting into med school.

Change it if you like analyzing concepts and logic. If you don't then I don't recommend it because you would likely do better in a biology major then a philosophy major. Like others have said, non-science majors get accepted more because they like their subject and thus can do well in it.

 

[eldoctor]

Its ok there. You ll get through. Have faith in lord.

 

[iwantMD]

He's climbing in your windows
He's snatchin your people up
Tryna ask em "why u mad" em so y'all need to
Hide your kids, hide your wife
Hide your kids, hide your wife
Hide your kids, hide your wife
And hide your husband
Cuz they're out attacking everyone out there
You don't have to come and confess
We're lookin for you
We gon find you
We gon find you
So you can run and tell that,
Run and tell that
Run and tell that, homeboy
Home, home, homeboy We got your t-shirt
You done left fingerprints and all
You are so smart
But You are really genius–for real

 

[gravitywave]

coupla points here:

1) there's some confusion in here between whether science courses are easier than non-science, or whether science GPAs are harder to maintain than non-science. debate on the former is pretty well settled. so far as the latter is concerned, i'll add that non-science GPAs are more subject to grade inflation than science ones. i don't think i've ever heard of a humanities course that was curved. i remember the list of people that were summa cum laude at my undergrad (at my school, latin honors were determined by a simple cGPA cutoff), it was dominated by humanities majors. i think there might have been 15 theatre majors that year and 3 or 4 of them graduated summa (top 5%).

the fact that engineering courses with their often brutal curves are non-science only enhances the difference.

2) music majors: when you guys get to med school, you'll see that there is a crazy variety of people here. schools are looking for basic capacity to handle the science workload first, yes, but after that they are often looking for diversity of perspective because it makes for a more interesting group of people. there's good research out there that supports the idea of diverse groups as more efficient problem-solvers, too. we all benefit from each other's differentness. the group of music majors that end up going into medicine is very small and extremely self-selecting. med schools want them because they have a unique perspective. ergo, music majors get in at a higher rate.